I hope you enjoyed this episode of Vintage vs. Reproduction. This was by far one of the most challenging to date. If you would like to see more episodes, please check out the playlist here: ruclips.net/p/PLaG2bBTXx7U6tf1DHulYw50VgYvJadnUP
I bought that updated pattern in ignorance, thinking it would be just the same as the old one. But since I haven’t made any dress from this pattern, and my granddaughter is now 6, I’m safe.😁😍
I completely agree with the pattern instructions showing more than one view at a time. I hate having to read everything to make sure I don't miss something because I have had to skip different view instructions. Or having to skip an entire column just to get to the rest of my view. This was another great video, Thank You.
I was around in the 50s, and oh how I loved my full dresses and crinkly petticoats. I was doing the math in my head, and then you did it, too. 18 inches?!?! That's a huge amount on a baby, n'est-ce pas? (See what I did there, Simplicity?)
My husband and I watched and he wondered what idiot they let do these things? So, why take out the fullness? Seriously! That’s the adorable part! I had dresses like this as a baby. My poodle had dresses like this when I was older. I couldn’t help myself, she fit them perfectly!
@@StephanieCanada I think it's to save fabric and because "modern" baby clothes are more wash/wear friendly. The vintage ones would require a LOT of ironing and I don't think many people do that nowadays. Unless they are actually pressing seams when they sew.
@@giovanninasuluh I would still want the extra fullness. It would be cuter than the way the modern baby dress turned out when I was done with it. I wouldn't mind ironing if it meant that my baby would have been the cutest one at church. Too late. She's almost 5 years old now.
I’ve actually made this repro a few times as baby shower gifts and I’m big annoyed to see the difference on the skirt panels! I had a hard time getting the skirt gathers even and satisfactory.. those extra 18 inches in skirt would have been great 😂😂😂
I have a confession to make. I don't sew. I still watch and love your videos. Sewing was just one of those things I never figured out. My mom would make my dance/choir costumes when I was a kid and I think I was scarred from the experience. But, this was another fun video. One of these days I might try to sew a napkin.
I simply adore your channel! Thank you! Years back well made little girls’ dresses all had deep three to four inch hems. It was the style. A skimpy hem was a sign of poor quality. Sometimes these deep hems were even doubled to allow for letting down, still keeping a deep hem as a child grew. Getting longer wear out of children’s garments may be another reason why the vintage pattern is so much wider. After watching you compare the two patterns, I now know to search for vintage patterns first before succumbing to buying the reproductions. How about comparing vintage doll clothing patterns vs. the modern ones, please?
Love your take on all this nonsense. I sort of suspected that new patterns "weren't quite the same" but kept telling myself it was just my gray hair acting up again, making the "past perfect".
Lol! I’ve never been to your channel before, and when you first showed the two patterns I thought you had found a modern one that looked a little like the vintage one, because they really looked nothing a like to me. It wasn’t until I started looking at the details of the pattern pictures that I realized they were supposed to be the same pattern. I thought at that point it was the difference between line drawings and photos. Long before the end of the video I concluded that my original assessment was correct: the two are vaguely similar patterns but not at all the same. To me from the beginning the modern one looked modern.
Why don’t the companies just REPRINT vintage patterns? I don’t understand that? They can literally scan the OG pattern if they no longer have it in their databases and then reprint them with appropriate lines and crap modern patterns have. Am I missing something or just stupid?
I've noticed they seem to try to make it harder, adding more pieces etc. Your tips are right on. I also tend to skim, or skip instructions. Does anyone WANT them to make these harder? Baby 'lothes are already harder.
@@StephanieCanada You totally are. If I weren't already sewing vintage clothes I would surely want to do it now. Do you know, what would make a video like that even better? If you were sewing the vintage vs. repro garments.
And I'm here not only avoiding the vintage designs but adding extra length to any skirt piece that is gathered because I always think it's too little to gather 😂😂😂 from now on, vintage designs for my baby girl patterns 😅😅😅
Today I was gifted with some very old real human baby garment patterns and two different doll cloths patterns. Needless to say, I have not opened them to see if they are used (and if all the pattern pieces are in the envelopes). It is to be noted that people are a lot bigger today than people were in the 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's. Why the pattern company would make the reproduction pattern narrower doesn't compute in my head. Bigger people will need wider (bigger) garments.
I dove into most of my conjecture on the WHY of it all in the original video rant that started this whole series. But a combination of using modern blocks and old line drawings is the biggest culprit.
Why wouldn't these companies have archived one of each of their patterns for reference? It seems strange to me that they would have to depend on donations for a copy of their own true vintage patterns.
So I was thinking the vintage pattern will give you the Shirley Temple, Baby Take a Bow, sweet full look, and the modern is just less fluffy, more like the modern Annie style dress.
How about doing a vogue pattern next? I heard they are mostly good in the "reproduction" aspect, so maybe it would be refreshing seeing some company doing a good job next. .... Or do a Burda pattern, seeing their reissues on the models you can see from a mile away that their patterns are nothing like the actual vintage ones
Ah yes, if you hung out til the end you may have heard me mention something about a Vogue pattern coming very soon! And i am trying to find one for Burda as well.
@@StephanieCanada Nice! I'm looking forward to see if Vogue deserves all the good comments of their vintage repros! Also, if you need some help finding vintage issues of "Burda moden" magazines, let me know, i have plenty issues from the 60s and knowledge about their reissued patterns from the 50s, i may not sell the ones i own since i'm a proud collector (and the pattern sheets are on the "sad" side and requires extra care) but i for sure can help you find what you need/want to compare from burda
So on my modern patterns I actually use a highlighter to mark the instructions for the view I am doing to prevent confusion. There was an incident before I started doing that. I had a meltdown.
I used to own a copy of the reproduction pattern for this baby dress. I believe that I used it, but I don't own any of my baby clothes anymore because I gave them away after my last baby grew out of them. I miss having babies.
@@StephanieCanada you are more then welcome! Your the reason I'm not so hard on myself when I tryed a reproduction pattern and the fit was garbage! Vintage originals for life!
Re: separate instructions for each view -- I do what you described in the video, but then I also do the opposite, which is try to follow the instructions for the wrong view, and have total anxiety meltdowns because of course it doesn't go with my pattern pieces.
I have actually skipped portions because of the way they organized the instructions. The last time I was making something with a newish Simplicity pattern I did not understand what I was supposed to do (my excuse is that I was tired when I read it late at night), went to the fabric store the next day to ask what I was missing and as I was asking realized what I did and lady at the fabric store used this as an opening to belittle me. Very Embarrassing.
"Simplicity" is an oxymoron when describing their instructions. On the modern ones, I look at the illustrations and then toss them aside. They are the literal worst. The vintage ones just assume you have a LOT of background knowledge. See Bernadette Banner's "In the usual way" video. :D
Whenever I see anything with instructions, I stop and write out all the instructions, and make myself little boxes to check off as I do them. I have tried just skipping around in the pattern, but it leads to TERRIBLE THINGS happening. Also, I don't know if it's ridiculous to comment on videos posted a year ago? But I do it anyway. ☺️
What was the difference in the hem depth? It feels like the repro didn’t use a wide hem like the vintage would’ve. I’d expect the vintage to have at least a 3-4” hem so it could be let down as the baby got taller. Autocorrect wanted “taller” to be “nuggets”; wrong child, yo.
@@StephanieCanada vintage would definitely have had a deeper hem than 1". I can't tell from the video what the hem depth is., however Simplicity 2017 from the same era has a 4" deep hem allowance on a size 3, so I'm assuming it would be about the same-ish. That would account for why the size 1 goes all the way to the "L" cut line in the modern one. I'll explore that with my vintage/repro analysys of S 2017 once I get my studio put back together.
I have some family vintage hand sewn baby clothes. I’m trying to find out the value. I was shocked to find only stuff from the 70’s, when my youngest son was born. Jeeze!
What is the point in advertising the pattern as 'vintage reproduction' when it isn't. The whole point of make a child's vintage garment is for the cute look of the fullness! The new pattern is really just another modern pattern and Simplicity is cashing in on calling it vintage. Misleading and downright lie I say.
I would love it if no one ever included the tone that goes with the colour bars ever again. It's horrible. There's some kind of audio engineering or technology reason it's the noise it is, but it makes me cringe every time. It's painful. I'm not complaining at you, just making a polite request, because I have no way of communicating it to anyone else. It's evocative, and I agree, that's exactly how it feels, and the bars are even kinda pretty. Just my ears hate it.
I hope you enjoyed this episode of Vintage vs. Reproduction. This was by far one of the most challenging to date. If you would like to see more episodes, please check out the playlist here: ruclips.net/p/PLaG2bBTXx7U6tf1DHulYw50VgYvJadnUP
Stephanie dropping an f-bomb over the reproduction pattern is all of our inner monologues.
YUP! I was so surprised with how badly this was.
I bought that updated pattern in ignorance, thinking it would be just the same as the old one. But since I haven’t made any dress from this pattern, and my granddaughter is now 6, I’m safe.😁😍
Hey you called out my suggestion for all the white space. I feel special 😄
Thank YOU for making it!!
You are special and HONESTLY! I wish SIMPLICITY etc. would listen! 🥲
I completely agree with the pattern instructions showing more than one view at a time. I hate having to read everything to make sure I don't miss something because I have had to skip different view instructions. Or having to skip an entire column just to get to the rest of my view. This was another great video, Thank You.
Thank you so much! Yeah, my brain does not compute these modern instructions AT ALL! I am glad I am not alone.
Dang! Simplicity should just advertise those patterns as inspired by instead of reproductions. I'll never buy another one.
It really is astonishing some of the choices they make. I have a Vogue coming to see how they do.
I was around in the 50s, and oh how I loved my full dresses and crinkly petticoats. I was doing the math in my head, and then you did it, too. 18 inches?!?! That's a huge amount on a baby, n'est-ce pas? (See what I did there, Simplicity?)
RIGHT?! I was SO floored by how much smaller they made the dress.
My husband and I watched and he wondered what idiot they let do these things? So, why take out the fullness? Seriously! That’s the adorable part! I had dresses like this as a baby. My poodle had dresses like this when I was older. I couldn’t help myself, she fit them perfectly!
I truly don't understand this one, because by all right it FEELS leke they got this in a donation, then ACTIVELY changed it.
@@StephanieCanada I think it's to save fabric and because "modern" baby clothes are more wash/wear friendly. The vintage ones would require a LOT of ironing and I don't think many people do that nowadays. Unless they are actually pressing seams when they sew.
@@giovanninasuluh I would still want the extra fullness. It would be cuter than the way the modern baby dress turned out when I was done with it. I wouldn't mind ironing if it meant that my baby would have been the cutest one at church. Too late. She's almost 5 years old now.
I’ve actually made this repro a few times as baby shower gifts and I’m big annoyed to see the difference on the skirt panels! I had a hard time getting the skirt gathers even and satisfactory.. those extra 18 inches in skirt would have been great 😂😂😂
OH NO! Well now you know and can adjust next time.
I have a confession to make. I don't sew. I still watch and love your videos. Sewing was just one of those things I never figured out. My mom would make my dance/choir costumes when I was a kid and I think I was scarred from the experience. But, this was another fun video. One of these days I might try to sew a napkin.
Thank you so much! That is very kind of you. I also, fully believe in you to sew! YOU CAN DO IT!
I absolutely love this series. So eye opening.
i truly dont understand why they dont just copy an original pattern
me either *waves in 2020 like existential crisis, but for pattern companies*
I simply adore your channel! Thank you!
Years back well made little girls’ dresses all had deep three to four inch hems. It was the style. A skimpy hem was a sign of poor quality. Sometimes these deep hems were even doubled to allow for letting down, still keeping a deep hem as a child grew.
Getting longer wear out of children’s garments may be another reason why the vintage pattern is so much wider.
After watching you compare the two patterns, I now know to search for vintage patterns first before succumbing to buying the reproductions.
How about comparing vintage doll clothing patterns vs. the modern ones, please?
Oh how I love the sass you serve in these videos hehe xx
Thank you Beverly!
Love your take on all this nonsense. I sort of suspected that new patterns "weren't quite the same" but kept telling myself it was just my gray hair acting up again, making the "past perfect".
I am so glad these videos help out!! It is very hard to piece together a sentence when half my words are just me swearing. 🤣🤣🤣
I did the repro pattern and loved the results.
Love the Vivaldi in the background
Thank you! I am still an opera stage manager at heart.
Not going to lie - the outtakes are always my favorite part. Never fails to make me laugh!
Thank you!
Lol! I’ve never been to your channel before, and when you first showed the two patterns I thought you had found a modern one that looked a little like the vintage one, because they really looked nothing a like to me. It wasn’t until I started looking at the details of the pattern pictures that I realized they were supposed to be the same pattern. I thought at that point it was the difference between line drawings and photos. Long before the end of the video I concluded that my original assessment was correct: the two are vaguely similar patterns but not at all the same.
To me from the beginning the modern one looked modern.
I remember little girl clothes of this vintage thank you for sharing this is very sentimental for me
Why don’t the companies just REPRINT vintage patterns? I don’t understand that? They can literally scan the OG pattern if they no longer have it in their databases and then reprint them with appropriate lines and crap modern patterns have. Am I missing something or just stupid?
You aren't stupid! I actually did a video discussing why they don't line up at the very beginning.
I've noticed they seem to try to make it harder, adding more pieces etc. Your tips are right on. I also tend to skim, or skip instructions. Does anyone WANT them to make these harder? Baby 'lothes are already harder.
I am SO entertained by this video! And now I want to sew vintage baby clothes 🤪
Thank you so much! I try to make the vintage clothes more accessible through these.
@@StephanieCanada You totally are. If I weren't already sewing vintage clothes I would surely want to do it now. Do you know, what would make a video like that even better? If you were sewing the vintage vs. repro garments.
And I'm here not only avoiding the vintage designs but adding extra length to any skirt piece that is gathered because I always think it's too little to gather 😂😂😂 from now on, vintage designs for my baby girl patterns 😅😅😅
Definitely would be interested in seeing buttericks 6239 1944 retro dress I've always wanted to get it and sew it but also know the pitfalls of repro
Thank you for the recommendation Zeffy, I will add those to the list!
I LOVE your shade. I also have been wondering whether or not 40s patterns laid out pattern instructions in such a way as to save paper during WW2?
I love and prefer vintage patterns ALWAYS but I am not petite and often I must adjust the original by grading (pain in the ass).
Today I was gifted with some very old real human baby garment patterns and two different doll cloths patterns. Needless to say, I have not opened them to see if they are used (and if all the pattern pieces are in the envelopes). It is to be noted that people are a lot bigger today than people were in the 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's. Why the pattern company would make the reproduction pattern narrower doesn't compute in my head. Bigger people will need wider (bigger) garments.
I love to dress my daughter's in ridiculous bullshit.
I do not understand why vintage reproduction patterns are so bad. Like is it just laziness?
I dove into most of my conjecture on the WHY of it all in the original video rant that started this whole series. But a combination of using modern blocks and old line drawings is the biggest culprit.
Why wouldn't these companies have archived one of each of their patterns for reference? It seems strange to me that they would have to depend on donations for a copy of their own true vintage patterns.
So I was thinking the vintage pattern will give you the Shirley Temple, Baby Take a Bow, sweet full look, and the modern is just less fluffy, more like the modern Annie style dress.
How about doing a vogue pattern next? I heard they are mostly good in the "reproduction" aspect, so maybe it would be refreshing seeing some company doing a good job next.
.... Or do a Burda pattern, seeing their reissues on the models you can see from a mile away that their patterns are nothing like the actual vintage ones
Ah yes, if you hung out til the end you may have heard me mention something about a Vogue pattern coming very soon! And i am trying to find one for Burda as well.
@@StephanieCanada Nice! I'm looking forward to see if Vogue deserves all the good comments of their vintage repros!
Also, if you need some help finding vintage issues of "Burda moden" magazines, let me know, i have plenty issues from the 60s and knowledge about their reissued patterns from the 50s, i may not sell the ones i own since i'm a proud collector (and the pattern sheets are on the "sad" side and requires extra care) but i for sure can help you find what you need/want to compare from burda
So on my modern patterns I actually use a highlighter to mark the instructions for the view I am doing to prevent confusion.
There was an incident before I started doing that. I had a meltdown.
Awesome!
I used to own a copy of the reproduction pattern for this baby dress. I believe that I used it, but I don't own any of my baby clothes anymore because I gave them away after my last baby grew out of them. I miss having babies.
Yessss! Let the roast begin!!!
Thank you for watching as always Cherry!
@@StephanieCanada you are more then welcome! Your the reason I'm not so hard on myself when I tryed a reproduction pattern and the fit was garbage! Vintage originals for life!
Re: separate instructions for each view -- I do what you described in the video, but then I also do the opposite, which is try to follow the instructions for the wrong view, and have total anxiety meltdowns because of course it doesn't go with my pattern pieces.
I'd love for you to make these dresses so we can see what they would both look like
I have actually skipped portions because of the way they organized the instructions. The last time I was making something with a newish Simplicity pattern I did not understand what I was supposed to do (my excuse is that I was tired when I read it late at night), went to the fabric store the next day to ask what I was missing and as I was asking realized what I did and lady at the fabric store used this as an opening to belittle me. Very Embarrassing.
Oh I am so glad I am not alone in thinking I would miss steps along the way.
"Simplicity" is an oxymoron when describing their instructions. On the modern ones, I look at the illustrations and then toss them aside. They are the literal worst. The vintage ones just assume you have a LOT of background knowledge. See Bernadette Banner's "In the usual way" video. :D
Whenever I see anything with instructions, I stop and write out all the instructions, and make myself little boxes to check off as I do them. I have tried just skipping around in the pattern, but it leads to TERRIBLE THINGS happening. Also, I don't know if it's ridiculous to comment on videos posted a year ago? But I do it anyway. ☺️
A check list!! That is smart!
I would love to see you do Simplicity 8593(repro)/1867(original).
Oh thank you so much for the suggestion!
What was the difference in the hem depth? It feels like the repro didn’t use a wide hem like the vintage would’ve. I’d expect the vintage to have at least a 3-4” hem so it could be let down as the baby got taller. Autocorrect wanted “taller” to be “nuggets”; wrong child, yo.
Oh that is interesting. I don't recall the vintage but I know the modern called for a 1" hem (if I remember correctly).
@@StephanieCanada vintage would definitely have had a deeper hem than 1". I can't tell from the video what the hem depth is., however Simplicity 2017 from the same era has a 4" deep hem allowance on a size 3, so I'm assuming it would be about the same-ish. That would account for why the size 1 goes all the way to the "L" cut line in the modern one. I'll explore that with my vintage/repro analysys of S 2017 once I get my studio put back together.
How does weight determine what size? My daughter was 10 lbs at 12 months...admittedly she had health issues, but still.
Who knows?! I think the baby clothing size has issues all around, truthfuly.
Is there a reason why they don't just reissue the vintage pattern? Copyright?
Haven't women been telling men for years that size doesn't matter? 😅 See we all have bad jokes!
Humor indeed but intense Archectectv is here 🏳️🌈👌🏾🦹🏾♂️🌷😍
I have some family vintage hand sewn baby clothes. I’m trying to find out the value. I was shocked to find only stuff from the 70’s, when my youngest son was born. Jeeze!
Yeah, some clothes have lots of value. Some have none. It is all about what is "trendy".
So I admit, I'm pretty bad and almost never read instructions. 😆 I just wing it and fight till it stops fighting back.
So, assuming that you made a pair of baby dresses according to the two sets of instructions, how did they turn out?
I would like for you to compare the old Simplicity 5924 with the new Simplicity 9104 :)
Thank you for the request! I will dig in and see what I can find.
@@StephanieCanada Thank you!
18 inches less???? On a BABY? What the holy hell?
I have hundreds of vintage patterns maybe even thousands 🤣
SAME!
I 100% do not understand the weight of the child being the size indicator…
B
Vogue 4579 vs Vogue 2903.
Thank you for the suggestion Michelle!
Bitten off cookie 😁 🍪
Yup, I realized I missed a HUGE graphic moment there.... but oh well.
@@StephanieCanada it's cool. I imagined it in 😜
What is the point in advertising the pattern as 'vintage reproduction' when it isn't. The whole point of make a child's vintage garment is for the cute look of the fullness! The new pattern is really just another modern pattern and Simplicity is cashing in on calling it vintage. Misleading and downright lie I say.
I would love it if no one ever included the tone that goes with the colour bars ever again. It's horrible. There's some kind of audio engineering or technology reason it's the noise it is, but it makes me cringe every time. It's painful. I'm not complaining at you, just making a polite request, because I have no way of communicating it to anyone else. It's evocative, and I agree, that's exactly how it feels, and the bars are even kinda pretty. Just my ears hate it.
That is a totally fair request. I only used it because I can't my "Candy Break" footage. I will do my best to not use it.
@@StephanieCanada Thank you! : )
Jesus. This is the worst difference I’ve seen so far !!
Oh this one was bad. Although I still think that the Walkaway is the worst.